Autism rights movement: Encyclopedia - Autism rights movement

Autism rights movement

The autism rights movement was started by adult autistic individuals in order to advocate and demand tolerance for what they refer to as their neurodiversity. The movement is supported by some neurotypicals including parents of autistic children. The movement has been criticized by parents of autistic children who disagree with its anti-cure and pro-neurodiversity views.

The use of the Internet has made it possible for autistics to present their perspective when they do not have the communication skills to do so offline. Even some mute autistics, such as Jasmine O'Neill, still write very well and present a case for societal acceptance of autism. These autistics do not desire a cure, but rather to be given opportunities to use their unique skills and perceptions in useful ways.

The position this movement considers most fundamental is the position that autism is not a disorder at all but simply a different way of being. They believe a cure for autism would destroy the original personality of the autistic person and replace them with a different (neurotypical) person. This movement has made ethical challenges to applied behavioral analysis (ABA) and psychiatric hospitals. The movement wants to include autistic adults in autism societies and provide services for autistic adults. They also wish to challenge descriptions of autism that they consider to be pitiful, insulting, and/or incorrect.

It should be noted that autism rights movement is not the official name of the movement. The movement has no official name. Other names such as autistic self-advocacy movement [1] and autistic liberation movement [2] have also been used.

Autism rights movement - The anti-cure perspective

The anti-cure prespective is considered the most fundamental value of the movement. Autistics with this perspective believe autism is not a disorder at all, but simply a variation in neurological hard-wiring. They believe that autism is a fundamental part of who they are and that autism is something that cannot be separated from the person. For this reason, they prefer to be referred to as "autistics" or "autistic people" instead of "people with autism" or "people who have autism", because "person with autism" implies that autism is something that can be removed from the person [3] (see person-first terminology). Autistics with this perspective oppose the idea of a cure for autism because they see it as destroying the original personality of the autistic individual, forcing them to imitate neurotypical behavior (which is unnatural to an autistic person), simply to make mainstream society feel less threatened by the presence of people who are different. Anti-cure autistics believe quirks and uniqueness of autistic individuals should be tolerated as the differences of any minority group should be tolerated [4]. When people talk about visions for a future where autism has been eradicated, anti-cure autistics usually see this as a wish for the end of their culture and way of being [5].

The most quoted person with this perspective is Jim Sinclair, who has written an article titled "Don't Mourn for Us" which has been widely distributed over the Internet. Websites such as autistics.org, Graphic Truth and Aspies For Freedom also present this view.

Autistics who oppose the idea of a cure are often presumed to have only very mild difficulties [6]. As several autistic authors have pointed out, this is not always the case and it is not always reasonable to compare the abilities of an autistic child with those of an autistic adult. The most common complaint is that anti-cure advocates are clearly able to articulate complex opinions in writing, which is seen by many parents as inconsistent with a diagnosis of autism. It is unclear why such parents rule out the possibility that their children will be able to do the same later in life. Autistics who oppose a cure may experience extreme difficulties on a daily basis. They simply believe autism is a fundamental part of who they are. Anti-cure autistics usually do wish they had fewer difficulties in life, and they do find some aspects of autism (like sensory issues) painful, but they do not want to have to sacrifice their personalities, values, and basic identities in order to make life easier [7] [8].

Anti-cure autistics ask that society become more tolerant and accommodating instead of pushing a cure. Anti-cure autistics are in favor of helping make the lives of autistic people easier, but they prefer the word "education" over "treatment", and they support programs that respect the individuality of the autistic person and only try to teach them things instead of change them.

Autism rights movement - People in the movement

Autism rights movement - Role of parents in the movement

Although this movement is sometimes quoted as consisting only of autistic people, there are actually some parents involved in the movement [9]. For example, the website Neurodiversity.com is part of the autistic rights movement and is run by neurotypical parents of an autistic child. These parents say they value their children's autism as part of their uniqueness and individuality [10]. They still wish to help their children but wish to do so without the desire for a cure. Autistic Autism rights activists wish to attract more parents to the movement and strongly value their parent allies[11]. In addition, some autistic people involved in the movement are also parents [12].

Autism rights movement - Organized groups

There are several organized groups such as Autism Network International (ANI), which is a self-advocacy organization run for and by autistic people and which hosts an annual conference called Autreat; Autistics.org, founded in December 1998 and that started a number of Internet campaigns; and Aspies For Freedom, an activist group which started Autistic Pride Day and protested against the Judge Rotenberg Center.

Autism rights movement - Individuals

A number of individuals have played an important role in the history of the movement. These persons are very respected in and out of the autistic community and some would even refer to them as the heroes of the movement.

• Amanda Baggs [13]
• Jasmine O'Neill
• Jim Sinclair [14]
• Judy Singer
• Michelle Dawson

Autism rights movement - Numbers

It might not be possible to calculate the number of people in the movement, partly because what constitutes autistic advocacy is disputed [15]. However, it is possible to measure the number of people who have participated in specific activist activities.

Internet petitions are a common form of activism in the movement, and the number of signatures received by these petitions are usually in the hundreds. The petition to defend the dignity of autistic citizens received 763 signatures [16]. Michelle Dawson's open letter to the Autism Society of Canada received 92 signatures by the time it was sent, October 22, 2003, and another 52 signatures on the web version which were signed after the original letter was sent [17]. The "Our Names are Autism Too" petition received 111 signatures from autistics, and 42 from allies [18].

Autism rights movement - History

Shortly after Autism Network International was founded in 1993, the world wide web began to emerge and autistic people started to make websites that expressed their views of autism. As time went on, more and more such websites started. Autistics.Org was founded in 1998 and started Internet campaigns in 2000.

Autism rights movement - Noteworthy events in the movement

• On December 20, 2004, Amy Harmon published an article in the New York Times titled "How about not curing us? Some autistics are pleading" which covered the anti-cure perspective. [19]

Autism rights movement - Issues

The movement has a number of issues that range from challenging the way autistic people are treated by others to challenging the way autism is portrayed.

Autism rights movement - Ethical challenges to autism treatment

There are many programs available intended as treatment for autism. However, autistic rights activists feel these treatments do not actually help autistic people but instead harm them. In particular, applied behavioral analysis (ABA), mental institutions, and drug therapy have been challenged. Michelle Dawson is one such person who has challenged ABA in the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004.

Autism rights movement - Opposition to eliminating autism

Some people have the goal of eliminating autism completely, and want there to be a future with no autism. Since those in the autism rights movement see autism as a natural human variation and not a disorder, they are opposed to attempts to eliminate autism. Autistic self-advocates have referred to the possible elimination of the autism genotype as "genocide" and "eugenics" [20].

In particular, there is opposition to prenatal genetic testing of autism in unborn fetuses, which some believe might be possible in the future if autism is genetic (see Heritability of autism). On February 23, 2005 Dr. Joseph Buxbaum of the Autism Genome Project at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine said there might be a prenatal test for autism in 10 years. The genetics of autism have proven to be extremely complex, however, bringing some relief of autistic self-advocates. In any case, the Autistic Genocide Clock was started in response to this, which counts down to 10 years after Buxbaum made this announcement [21].

The public has started to debate the ethics involved in the possible elimination of a genotype that has liabilities and advantages, which may be seen as tampering with nature and natural selection in particular. MSNBC has an article titled "Would you have allowed Bill Gates to be born?" which deals with this issue.

Autism rights movement - Opposition to an alleged insulting view of autism

It is the opinion of autistic rights activists that many people present an insulting view of autism. One of the goals of the movement is to expose and challenge those claims they find offensive.

Some things autistic rights activists find offensive are (1) the comparison of autism to a national tragedy or fatal disease, (2) statements such as "autism is worse than cancer and 9/11 combined", and (3) claims that autism is a death sentence. Michelle Dawson has protested the statement "autism is worse than cancer in many ways because the person with autism has a normal lifespan" [22]. Even some pro-cure advocates believe some of these statements go too far.

Dr. Boyd Haley, chairman of the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky, recently termed autism "mad child disease" in speaking about children whose autism was allegedly caused by mercury poisoning. This term offended some autistics as well as some parents of autistic children, and the "petition to defend the dignity of autistic citizens" was started by Neurodiversity.com in protest.

Autistic rights activists also reject terming the reported increase in the autistic population as an epidemic since the word epidemic implies autism is a disease. The autism epidemic idea is controversial in any case; anti-cure activists propose that the reported increase in autism may be due to the fact that more people are simply being diagnosed as autistic and that historically, more people went undiagnosed.

Some autistic adults find the puzzle piece ribbon offensive. Autistics.Org has a button that reads "I am not a puzzle, I am a person." Oddizms has created a rainbow moebius ring to symbol autism awareness and replace the puzzle piece ribbon.

Autistic rights activists find offensive a trend where people attempt to make people aware of autism by discussing how much money autistic people allegedly cost (forgetting to mention how much it would cost to have to do without the findings and inventions of people suspected of having the condition e.g. Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, William Shockley etc). These campaigns give the impression that autistics are a burden on tax payers and a waste of money, and activists compare this to arguments Nazis used to support Adolf Hitler's T-4 Euthanasia Program and also the American eugenics movement [23]. Plus some autistic activists believe these campaigns fail to account for what they see as valuable contributions the autistic phenotype has made towards the advancement of the human race.

Autism rights movement - Adult issues

Adult inclusion

Many in the autistic rights movement believe the status quo of autism issues focuses too much on children and parents, and tends to exclude autistic adults. They point to various autism organizations like Autism Society of America that have a child as a logo and parents having more power than autistic adults in autism organizations. Michelle Dawson believes that the Autism Society of Canada excludes autistic adults [24]. Autistic people oppose this because they feel autistics, not non-autistic parents, should be the primary focus of autism organizations. They also believe there are a lot more services for autistic children and their parents than for autistic adults, and some advocates of adult inclusion believe that the services and resources that are claimed to be for autistic children are really just for the parents (such as respite).

Accuracy of information about autistic adults

Autistic rights activists believe many people considered autism experts publish false information about what happens to autistic children when they become adults. They claim that while some autistic adults in the autism rights movement have significant difficulties in life, many of the pessimistic predictions that had been given to them when they were children did not come true. Because of this, autistic rights activists believe pessimistic (from their point of view) things autism experts are saying to the parents of autistic children of today are also false.

Adult diagnosis

Autistic adults claim that the definition afforded in an autism diagnosis is designed for children and not for adults, which makes the parameters unworkable and difficult in maintaining/obtaining a proper diagnosis. Because adults are different than they were as children, they no longer fit the model of an autistic individual. In addition, autism diagnosis is sometimes taken less seriously when it is made in adulthood rather than childhood, because some people claim if autism were "severe" it would have been noticed in childhood. Some autistic adults respond to this by claiming that when they were children there was much more ignorance about autism than there is in the present.

A common reason for autistic adults to seek a diagnosis is to obtain services and/or accommodation for difficulties associated with autism. Some, however, only seek a diagnosis for the sake of a personal identity—as a confirmation of why they feel "different" in a neurotypical society. Sometimes autistic adults find a self-diagnosis to be sufficient for this purpose (even though some prefer to get an "official" diagnosis for a credible confirmation). Those who have diagnosed themselves as autistic would not necessarily be seen as autistic by doctors.

Services and accommodation

The autism rights movement desires more services and accommodations for autistic adults. They also desire autistic adults to have equal opportunity in employment and in education.

Autism rights movement - Misconceptions of autistic traits

Autistic rights activists believe many characteristics described as being autistic traits are really only misconceptions [25] [26]. People in this movement desire to educate the population about what they believe are the real reasons these alleged misconceptions occur.

It is considered characteristic of autism for autistic people to lack a "theory of other minds", that is, for autistic people to be unaware that other people do not necessarily think or know the same things that they do. Many people feel that autistics are only perceived to lack a theory of mind because autistic people do not necessarily communicate with others in the same ways neurotypicals do. Not only would this prevent others' knowing whether autistics have a theory of mind or not, but lack of communication might make autistics less likely to have knowledge of other people's thoughts and knowledge. Autistics often believe neurotypicals are insensitive to their perspective and write parodies based on this that neurotypicals lack theory of other minds [27] [28].

It is reported that 75% to 85% of autistic people are mentally retarded. Many people believe autistics are incorrectly diagnosed with mental retardation because of lack of an ability to communicate what they know, and due to fundamental flaws in intelligence testing. According to the original definition by Aaron Rosanoff (as a segment of temperament in his "theory of personality", published circa 1915), it is also a factor that it is quite possible to be strongly autistic, physically normal, and highly intelligent, thus escaping diagnosis as children, and consequently not appearing in current statistics ^[29]. Gifted children sometimes have autistic traits, which may suggest an association.

Although some people believe autistic people have no emotions and no sense of humor, many autistic people reject this and report that they do experience a range of emotions. The perception that autistics are emotionless comes largely from the fact that autistics are relatively likely to keep their emotions to themselves, for example not laughing when they find something funny. Autistics also often have different emotional reactions from what neurotypicals expect, and neurotypicals may therefore perceive a general lack of emotion due to an actual lack of some specific reaction that they were expecting. Autistics may also be amused by things that non-autistics would not find funny. Autistic adults such as Jerry Alter and Jessy Park report being greatly amused by concepts "such as eating roads or flowers are growing on a telephone", which are reminiscent of Monty Python-type British absurd humor.

Autism rights movement - Functioning labels

The autistic rights movement has contributed to controversies about functioning labels in the autism spectrum. In particular, autistic rights activists are concerned with the functioning labels making it more difficult to get services for difficulties associated with autism, and they believe the terms are used as an excuse for their opponents to ignore the viewpoints they do not like.

Autism rights movement - Status as a social minority group

It has been proposed that the Autistic community are a social minority group and therefore should be considered as such by the United Nations. This would give certain protection against the forcible use of cures and therapies, either now or in the future. They say that if the fact that people on the autistic spectrum are different in their own right was accepted worldwide, instead of their being regarded as simply a faulty version of "normal" people, it would provide greater freedom to the whole community. Without the stigma or pressure to communicate in the same way as neurotypicals, autistics would be enabled to form social bonds in ways that best suit them. It is often the case that typing or signing is easier than talking for autistics, and there is a large autistic community on the internet, many of whom are socially isolated locally. The statement from the autistic community on recognition for minority status is at [30].

Some claim that the proposal that the Autistic community be classified as a minority group by the United Nations has divided the autistic community. Many autistics believe it is self-defeating to receive special status when they are capable of achieving things for themselves as successfully as neurotypicals.

Autism rights movement - Activist methods and activities

Autism rights movement - Speculation of autism in famous people

There has been speculation that well-known contemporary and historical people may have been autistic in some form [31] and the autism rights movement has participated in this speculation. Those who are most commonly discussed are Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Isaac Newton, and Thomas Jefferson. In addition, there are rumors that Steven Spielberg is diagnosed. Although this is brought up in the autistic rights movement, it is controversial outside the autistic rights movement as well. Some people considered autism professionals and/or psychologists (such as Simon Baron-Cohen and Christopher Gillberg) have contributed to this speculation.

This speculation may simply be an attempt to create role models for autistics and to show people that autistics can do constructive things and contribute to society. This issue is discussed by autistic rights activists often to convince people that it would be a loss to society if autism were cured. Others in the autistic rights movement, however, dislike this argument, because they feel autistics should be able to value their uniqueness without the desire for a cure even regardless of whether or not people like Einstein were not autistic.

Some autistics value their "being" regardless of what others think, or of how unique it is. They prefer to redress the current diversion from the original clinical meaning. Pointing out the immense contributions of scientists and inventors who might have been autistic may be an attempt of anti-cure advocates to change the viewpoints of pro-cure advocates.

Autism rights movement - Activist campaigns

In the early 2000s, activist campaigns started, mostly over the Internet.

• In April 2000, Autistics.org hosted an online counter-rally called "Hear Our Voices" to protest an autism rally in Washington, D.C. called "Hear Their Silence" that they disagreed with. [32] [33]
• In 2004, a Autistic Adults Picture Project was started in response to similar projects started by parents that only include pictures of children.
• In September 2004, the "Our Names are Autism Too" is a campaign that protested an article titled "My Name is Autism" that presented a view autistic activists found insulting.
• In October 2004, the Signatures of Intolerance campaign was started over controversy surrounding ABA in Canada.
• In 2004, the Petition to Defend the Dignity of Autistic Citizens was started to protest the use of insults to describe autism (such as "mad child disease").
• In 2004 Aspies for Freedom started a campaign against the use of electric shock devices on autistic children at the Judge Rotenberg Center in Massachusetts, USA. This is an ongoing campaign by Aspies For Freedom and will continue until the use of such devices is stopped. The campaigns involves raising public awareness of this activity at the Center, an e-mail campaign, and protests are planned.
• Aspergian Pride's Cure for Ignorance Campaign maintains and distributes an extensive directory of advocacy and resource links for the purpose of raising public awareness of the autism rights movement.
• In January 2005 Kathleen Seidel published Lenny Schafer's Inquisition in protest of Lenny Schafer's assertions that people capable of communication can't be considered autistic, and that the autism spectrum should be redefined to exclude Asperger's Syndrome.
• In February 2005 autistics.org started the "Autistics speak" campaign to protest NBC's website Autism Speaks because autistics.org believes NBC's "Autism speaks" is mostly non-autistic people claiming to speak on behalf of autistic people.
• In January 2006 A.S.W.CThe A.S.W.C formed a democratic advocacy movement for parents and individuals with any form of autism. Based upon free speech it provides a forum to debase issues without censorship of points of views that are disagreed upon. Its principle owner is Nathan Young from Fortuna California and is constructed to be accepting of all view points respectfully.

Autism rights movement - Controversy

Autism rights movement - Criticism

The movement has been criticized, mostly by parents of autistic children who believe the goals of the movement will not help their own children. There are some critics of the movement who still support some of the movement's goals despite opposing other goals.

Critics of the movement argue that the autistic spectrum people in the movement are high functioning and/or Asperger's and that they have the ability to communicate. Lenny Schafer, for example, argues that those in the movement have Asperger's not autism, and believes if they would change every use of autism with Asperger's the movement might make sense ^[34]. They argue that low functioning autistic people do not have the ability to communicate at all, but that the movement's activists clearly have the ability to write eloquently, and they believe that those who have no ability to speak at all are likely to want or need very different things from those who can communicate. Bobby Newman said in an issue of the Schafer Autism Report that he believes that those without basic skills of self-care would not want those who are capable of communication to speak on their behalf.

The anonymous website Autism: A Debilitating Disease, Not a Culture argues that the movement's goals of understanding autistic people and changing the world to accommodate them is not enough because understanding will not end self-injury in autistic people and will not teach them to communicate [35].

Some critics of the movement believe Michelle Dawson played an important role in the Auton case in the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 and is responsible for Canadian children not receiving applied behavioral analysis, which is considered an important therepy by the people who make this criticism; these critics believe ABA has been scientifically proven to be effective and gives autistic children the best chance of success in adulthood. Some critics also fear that the movement will prevent other autistic children from receiving treatment.

Kit Weintraub said, "I am afraid of this movement" ^[36] and has said she would like to change her son's quirkiness because it prevents him from making friends ^[37]. She says, "It's no fun being different" ^[38].

Some critics argue that only the opinions of autism professionals are valid, and not the opinion of autistic activists, because they argue that it is those who are experts in a field who can study a disorder, not those who have the disorder.

Autism rights movement - Responses from the movement

The autism rights movement has responded to its critics.

Autistics.Org says that they receive e-mails from parents of autistic children, saying that the parents claim their own children are different and have more difficulties than them. The people at Autistics.Org argue that when the parents describe their children's difficulties, they are describing the children to have difficulties that range from very similar to their own difficulties that they had as children, to very similar to their current difficulties as adults [39].

Activists in the movement have responded to criticisms that say they are high functioning or Asperger's by saying that some of them have been called low functioning as children by professionals, some of them can write but have no oral speech, and that some of them have periods of time where any form of communication is impossible.

In an article titled History of ANI, Jim Sinclair, who has also been target of similar criticism from very early on, goes into detail about "the politics of opposition to self-advocacy". He notes, for example, that a common tactic is denying that "the persons mounting the challenge are really members of the group to which they claim membership". Sinclair illustrates the point with an analogy regarding Frederick Douglass, a nineteenth-century African American who became a well-known abolitionist writer and speaker. Douglass was after some time suspected of being an impostor because he was well spoken and educated, so he did not fit the stereotype of black slaves.

A.M. Baggs who has been published in the Autism Information Library responded to Bobby Newman's argument by saying that she was once in the situation Newman describes and would have wanted activists to stop her from receiving treatment she felt was harmful [40].

Autistics.Org has responded to Kit Weintraub's wish to remove her son's quirkiness so that he will make friends by saying that when someone is bullied or ostracized for a quality, it is because of people who are intolerant and not the fault of people who are different [41].

The claim that autistic activists cannot claim expertise in autism has sometimes been countered by autistic activists by saying that doctors once believed homosexuality was a disorder when it in fact was not, and they claim from this that today's doctors may be making the same mistake with autism. Homosexuality was dropped from the DSM in 1973 mostly due to activism [42]. Furthermore, autistic advocates such as Michelle Dawson are, in fact, experts in autism and some autistic people have degrees in psychology. Some argue that given the perseverative traits of many autistics, it is not far fetched to suppose that some of them have acquired expert-level knowledge in the area.

Further responses of the movement can be summarized as follows:

• The critics' position is tautological: They claim autistic persons cannot communicate and therefore don't have a voice. If they learn to communicate, they are no longer autistic by definition, and therefore are not allowed to speak on behalf of autistics.
• The critics' responses consist mostly of ad hominem and straw man attacks [43], a basic lack of understanding about autism, and anecdotal accounts about scientifically dubious "recoveries". They have not addressed the challenges to behavioral interventions in any meaningful way.
• It is not true that all autistic advocates are diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. Some of the most outspoken ones are autistic.
• Critics should abstain from attempting to diagnose over the internet.
• The prognosis of autism is notoriously unpredictable. Autistic activists ask, why should parents assume that their 3 or 4 year old child will behave the same way at age 30? They have also argued there are no indications that the so-called autism epidemic is anything more than mass hysteria, and that all the "miracle cures" (which are not scientifically validated) are all but mass delusion.
• Being able to communicate well in writing is not inconsistent with a diagnosis of autism.
• Autism does not disappear the moment a person learns to communicate. Successfully teaching to communicate is not the same as "curing" autism.
• Parents should consider that one day their autistic children will grow up and could very well join the autistic rights movement.
• Parents should take into account the self-esteem of their autistic children. Activists ask, is it better to teach these children that they have a neurological disease requiring intensive behavioral training to correct, or that they have unique and special neurology they should cherish and accept for what it is?
• Some of the critics' own children have apparently learned to communicate already, so their position is confusing because they argue that the writing abilities of autistic activists is evidence that they are fundamentally higher functioning than the children of the critics.
• Autistic individuals are usually very sensitive. When their diagnosis (or even a self-diagnosis) is questioned, they usually find that insulting, abusive and cruel.

Autism rights movement - Ongoing debate

The debate is ongoing and critics have responded to the autism rights movement's responses to their original criticisms, and the autism rights movement has responded to those.

Autism rights movement - Criticism within the movement

Within the movement there can be disagreements. Some autistics would prefer autism to be seen as a disability instead of a disease, meaning that it would have a status similar to blindness or deafness. Analogies to deaf culture have been cited. The concern is that calling for autism to be viewed as simply a way of being or as a minority group (much like gay and lesbian persons) would take away from the alleged needs some autistics have for aid and assistance.

Joel Smith has criticized the movement because he says that there are some within the movement who only want to include certain subgroups of autistic people in the autistic community and that some in the movement are insulting to neurotypicals [44].

Autism rights movement - Notes

1. ^  See also the development of this theory by Humm and Wadsworth, resulting in their Aptitude Gradient of 1935, described here: [45]. This was based on Rosanoff's definition of "autism" (etc.) which is also that which Hans Asperger (and, most probably, Leo Kanner?) clearly had in mind (when describing his subjects not as "autistic", but as having autistic pathology), but is now resolutely ignored by clinical experts (most notably by Lorna Wing, who seems to have been unaware of this when describing Asperger's Syndrome).

See also

• Specifically related to autism rights movement

• Autistic culture
• Neurodivergent
• Neurodiversity

• Autism in general

• Asperger's syndrome
• Controversies in autism
• Intelligence tests and autism

• Autism lists

• List of autism-related topics
• List of autistic people
• List of fictional characters on the autistic spectrum

• Other movements and causes

• Anti-psychiatry
• Deaf culture
• Disability rights movement
• Institutional damage
• MindFreedom International
• Psychiatric survivors movement

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Autism rights movement", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki